Wind farms in NSW are now regulated as ‘polluters’ and required to pay licence fees of up to $16,950 after the Upper House rejected a Greens motion to dump the O’Farrell government’s destructive new regulations.
Yesterday Greens NSW MP John Kaye introduced a motion to the NSW Legislative Council to disallow (ie remove) sections of the Protection of the Environment Operations Amendment (Scheduled Activities) Regulation 2013 that:
Defined wind generation as a scheduled activity under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (the Act) and
Imposed license fees on such activities.
See below for John’s full speech from the debate yesterday.
The O’Farrell government has already plunged the wind energy sector in NSW into chaos by failing to finalise their draft wind farm guidelines. The guidelines were released in December 2011, and seek to impose severe restrictions on wind farm developments including unreasonable noise restrictions and significant buffer distances.
These new requirements will impose yet more uncertainty onto the wind electricity sector in NSW and undermine the expansion of this cost-effective renewable energy technology.
Wind power plays a crucial role in developing a low-carbon energy sector in NSW. Over $11 billion in additional investment is currently on the table for new wind farm development in NSW, with the potential to employ 3940 people and power 2,361,326 homes.
Do you think wind power plays an important role in building jobs-rich, low-carbon NSW? Join the 100% Renewable NSW campaign here!
If you would like to read the full transcript of the debate, including Coalition members reasons for opposing the motion, click on the following links: First half of the debate | Second half
DISALLOWANCE OF PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT OPERATIONS (SCHEDULED ACTIVITIES) REGULATION 2013
Dr JOHN KAYE [3.05 p.m.]: I move:
That, under section 41 of the Interpretation Act 1987, this House disallows item [3] of schedule 1 and item [3] of schedule 2 to the Protection of the Environment Operations Amendment (Scheduled Activities) Regulation 2013, published on the New South Wales Legislation website on 28 June 2013.
Effectively, this motion stops the O’Farrell Government imposing administrative licence fees on New South Wales wind farms. This motion will stop the O’Farrell Government creating yet another disincentive to develop an industry that not only will generate thousands of jobs but also will slash the State’s greenhouse gas emissions, bring tens of billions of dollars of investment to this State and position New South Wales as a global leader in clean energy. The regulation this motion seeks to partially disallow does two things: creates licensing fees for coal seam gas exploration, assessment and production activities and for electricity generation activities by wind turbines. Symbolically, the O’Farrell Government lumps together wind turbine generation and coal seam gas exploration into the one amendment seeking—
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: Coal seam is much better.
The Hon. Duncan Gay: No, wind turbines are much worse.
Dr JOHN KAYE: I acknowledge the interjection and its enthusiastic reception from Government members. It is important that the people of New South Wales understand that this regulation comes from a profound absence of science and hostility to clean energy solutions and jobs in New South Wales. If New South Wales jobs are to have a secure future, there must be renewable energy. Item [3] of schedule 2 to the regulation gives the game away. It states clearly that administrative licence fees on wind farms will be up to $16,950 a year—that is, 150 penalty units at $113 a penalty unit. That totals an almost $17,000 year impost on a wind farm over four gigawatt hours per year. Then it goes on to say there are no load-based fees, stating:
There are no assessable pollutants and therefore no load-based fee in relation to this activity.
The O’Farrell Government states very clearly that, in fact, there are no assessable pollutants but, nonetheless, “we will impose an administrative fee on wind farms.”
The Hon. Rick Colless: What about visual pollutants?
Dr JOHN KAYE: The Hon. Rick Colless, the Deputy Government Whip, says, “What about visual pollution?” Interestingly, his interjection shows that he does not know a lot about environmental regulation in New South Wales. If he did, he would know that this regulation to the Protection of the Environment Operations Act contains no mention of visual pollution. If he is worried about visual pollution, perhaps he should personally do something about it. Even though there is no assessable pollutant, the regulation imposes an administrative fee to collect data on the absence of an assessable pollutant. To be kind to the O’Farrell Government, presumably it is talking about noise.
Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: Noise pollution.
Dr JOHN KAYE: I note the Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile’s interjection. Let me talk about noise pollution. The question that should be asked is: Do wind farms have a health or environmental impact from noise pollution? Every year for the past decade the National Health and Medical Research Council has issued a statement that says there is no noise-related health impact from wind farms.
The Hon. Charlie Lynn: Rubbish.
Dr JOHN KAYE: I do not know whether the Hon. Charlie Lynn is saying that the National Health and Medical Research Council is talking rubbish—
The Hon. Charlie Lynn: I am talking about the people who have to put up with it.
Dr JOHN KAYE: That is interesting.
The Hon. Charlie Lynn: They think it is rubbish.
Dr JOHN KAYE: Every recent survey has shown that people who live close to wind farms have a higher rate of acceptance of wind farms than those who live further away.
The Hon. Charlie Lynn: That is absolute rubbish.
Dr JOHN KAYE: The issue is where is this concern coming from? Every year for the past decade the National Health and Medical Research Council has issued a statement that says there is no health impact from wind farms.
Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: There are surveys showing there is an impact.
Dr JOHN KAYE: I note the interesting interjection by the Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile. Surveys show that people think there are health impacts. There is a huge difference between people thinking—
Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: No, the surveys show that there are health impacts.
Dr JOHN KAYE: There is no way a survey can show a health impact; that is absurd. It is symptomatic of the nonsensical non-science that has infected the debate around wind farms, not the least of which is the utter rubbish put forward by the Waubra Foundation. The National Health and Medical Research Council, in response to the nonsense coming from the Waubra Foundation—and probably members of this Chamber—has commissioned a detailed review of the known science on health impacts. The review should be available later this year or early next year. It begs the question: Given that the National Health and Medical Research Council has repeatedly said there are no health impacts and is conducting a more detailed study which is not yet finished, why is the O’Farrell Government seeking to impose licence fees presumptively to regulate noise associated with wind farms?
The O’Farrell Government, for cheap political reasons, has swallowed the poison distributed by shonks such as the Waubra Foundation. Without any scientific evidence or reference to the sensible, peer-reviewed science which has said time and again there is no health impact, the shonks stir up discontent and fear amongst communities where wind farms are located. By stirring up discontent and fear, they create a self-fulfilling prophecy. People do suffer from headaches, but their headaches are from the stress created by the Waubra Foundation and the anticipation of health impacts that do not exist. I know there are members in this Chamber who Google “health impacts and wind farms” and read statements such as, “My chickens laid eggs without yolks because of a wind farm”.
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: Shame.
Dr JOHN KAYE: This stuff is nonsense.
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: Why do you hate chickens?
Dr JOHN KAYE: Members should go to the website of Professor Simon Chapman, the Professor of Health at the University of Sydney.
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: Free the chickens.
Dr JOHN KAYE: The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps will get his chance. I hope he does because I am looking forward to more of his comments about flat earth science being put on the record. I urge all members to go to Simon Chapman’s website to read about the utterly absurd 116 supposed health impacts. The document, “Draft NSW Planning Guidelines—Wind Farms” appears to be the source of our trouble. The document was published in December 2011 as a draft for public consultation. We are rapidly heading towards the end of October 2013, yet we have not yet seen the final version. In those draft guidelines the noise impact standard for wind farms was set at five decibels lower than in any other jurisdiction in Australia, in Europe or in the United States of America. Five decibels does not sound like a lot but, at the risk of taxing the brain of the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps beyond its elastic limit, decibels are a logarithmic scale and five decibels means effectively one-third of the noise power. Therefore, the noise power to be allowed in New South Wales is one-third less than in any other jurisdiction in Australia, in Europe or in the United States of America. Large areas of New South Wales will effectively be sterilised if the wind planning guidelines go ahead, with no perceptible gain in noise amenity for residents anywhere in the State.
The Greens support appropriate levels of noise protection for homes, schools and workplaces. I, Dr Mehreen Faruqi and other members of The Greens have argued for years about the noise associated with motorways. Many studies have shown a proven impact on the health of individuals from noise associated with motorways, and I would like to see more regulation in this area. However, that is not the way of the O’Farrell Government; it is coming after wind farms. The guidelines impose a restriction on noise levels that is almost impossible to achieve and has no additional benefit for local residents. The level of 35 decibels is measured outside a house. Inside a house, the level would be less than the noise heard in one’s bedroom from a refrigerator located outside. It is an absurdly low level of noise. The level is less than the standard noise that is acceptable in libraries around Australia.
This issue is important because to create a barrier to wind farms creates a barrier to the renewable energy industry in the future. According to the Clean Energy Council, the wind farm industry in New South Wales has just shy of $12 billion worth of investment. What other industry in Australia that offers to invest $12 billion in the State, create almost 4,000 jobs, reduce the State’s greenhouse gas emissions by 17 million tonnes and slash a total of 28 per cent from the electricity greenhouse emissions would be confronted with the same level of hostility from government? When the aluminium smelter in Kurri Kurri was at risk, the political process went into meltdown over 500 jobs. Yet not a tear has been shed for the 4,000 jobs that are being put at risk by a government that is busy signalling to the wind industry, through this regulation and in other ways, its deeply hostility towards it. New South Wales currently has 11 per cent of Australia’s wind turbines; we should have 30 per cent. We are underperforming, even by Australia’s pathetic standards.
The imposition of these fees—albeit relatively small fees—sends a message that the O’Farrell Government is only open for business to its mates. As to this industry, which generates wealth and creates jobs, the O’Farrell Government is using noise regulation as a weapon to create uncertainty and to make projects less bankable or to stifle them. Investors are afraid that if they build wind farms they will be harassed out of business by the O’Farrell Government whose leader, when he was elected to power, said he hoped there would never be another wind farm in New South Wales. He hopes there will not be 4,000 jobs or 2.7 million households in New South Wales powered by wind farms. He hopes that New South Wales will not have the capacity to export renewable energy credits to other States. He hopes that we will not create the basis for an export industry that could see New South Wales become a global leader or an industry that will address chronic unemployment in places such as Wollongong where almost 50 per cent of its young people do not have a job. I know that the Deputy-President (The Hon. Paul Green) is personally concerned and understands what I am saying.
At best, the part of this regulation relating to wind farms is inept. At worst, it is an attempt to signal to the wind energy industry that New South Wales will harass wind farms and drive them out of the State. It is sending a message to bankers that there should be no wind farms. The Government is falling over backwards to encourage the coal seam gas industry. I have no doubt that the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham will have something to say on that. The Government is hell-bent on destroying an industry that can work with communities, create jobs and solve our greenhouse gas crisis. It can contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and to taking the pressure off the global system. At the very least, this regulation should stay off the books until the wind farm planning guidelines have been either approved or abandoned and the National Health and Medical Research Council has published its final report. To do otherwise is to fly in the face of good policy, destroy jobs and disregard very important science. [Time expired.]